Overview
Richard Vallat is a highly sought-after KC that is ranked in all three areas of the directories in relation to Tax and is recognised as being “technically very, very good". Richard practices in all areas of revenue law and this includes advice and litigation in the following areas: personal tax, corporate tax, VAT and other indirect taxes, stamp duty, stamp duty land tax and tax-related litigation including professional negligence.
Richard is the current Chair of the Revenue Bar Association as well as the Chair of Chambers Pupillage and Tenancy committees.
Richard is qualified to accept Public Access instructions.
A copy of Richard Vallat’s privacy notice can be found here.
Corporate tax
Richard is creative, intelligent, efficient and equally excellent on his feet as on paper. Richard boasts a corporate tax practice that also includes tax-related professional negligence and contractual disputes with a tax element.
In relation to Corporate Tax the directories laud Richard as a leader that is ”very knowledgeable and able to take difficult concepts and make them easy to understand.” He is a methodical thinker and a clear and persuasive advocate.”
Examples of Richard’s recent work includes:
- Ingenious Film Partners v HMRC – a case which is recognised as the largest and most high profile of the film scheme cases. This is a notable case since it involves c.£700 million of tax relating to well over £1 billion of film finance transactions used to fund many of the biggest British hit movies of the last decade, and a large tax scheme devised by a major firm of accountants. The fact that so many HNW individuals, including numerous celebrities, invested money in it means that there are significant corporate and personal tax implications is the reason it is so well known.
- Inmarsat plc v HMRC – This is an interesting and highly unusual case concerning capital allowances on satellites. The taxpayer is a British satellite company that offers global mobile services through the medium of thirteen geostationary telecommunications satellites. It is enormously expensive to launch satellites into space – the company has had to pay as much as £400 million to achieve this level of coverage. The question has therefore arisen of whether it can claim capital allowances on the expenditure. The problem is, however, that ownership of the plant purchased is a necessary provision for claiming capital allowances, and while the company owns the satellites it merely leased the launch vehicles to get them into space.
- Hargreaves Property Holdings Ltd v HMRC – along with Calypso Blaj this is a case in which the the FTT dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal against assessments to income tax on the basis that the taxpayer had a duty to deduct withholding tax (with the exception of certain de minimis amounts) on certain interest payments. The Tribunal gave a clear and useful exposition of the law on UK withholding tax of interest payments. More particularly, it considered key concepts in this area such as ‘UK source’ (the FTT held that the underlying commercial reality was that the interest paid on the loans arose in the UK), ‘yearly interest’, and application of the principles in McGuckian/Ramsay.
Indirect tax
Richard is “a brilliant lawyer who knows SDLT like the back of his hand. He is particularly good on VAT and film finance issues and is a genuine expert on all tax-related matters.”
Recent work includes:
- SDLT on high value residential property transactions including partnerships and close companies / de-enveloping; consequences of historic planning for new purchasers; “mixed use” arguments; multiple dwellings relief.
- SDLT on various commercial property transactions including classification of buildings and restructuring of property holding unit trusts.
- SDRT including Henderson Investment Funds (redemption of units in unit trust; strict construction of relief).
- VAT administration, assessment and settlement issues including Serpentine Trust; substantive matters including classification, charities, hot food, buildings etc.
Private client
Richard regularly handles large significant personal tax planning advice and litigation and has done throughout his career, gaining a high degree of expertise in IHT, income tax, CGT, SDLT and planning with offshore trusts. Richard is also involved in a number of ongoing appeals for the taxpayer, of which the Ingenious Film Partners work has the highest profile, as well as for HMRC. Other ongoing work spans domiciliary issues, tax planning on divorce and business property relief on estates. Richard is recognised in the directories as someone that “Provides very clear and practical guidance. He has a thorough knowledge of the law and its implications.”
Recent work includes:
- Ingenious Games -v- HMRC – A notable matter with a value well over £1 billion of film finance transactions used to fund many of the biggest British hit movies of the last decade, and a large tax scheme devised by a major firm of accountants. The fact that so many HNW individuals, including numerous celebrities, invested money in it means that there are significant corporate and personal tax implications, as well as ensuring it considerable publicity.
- In the matter of Chalcot, Richard dealt with arguments of whether arrangements made between a company and its two employed shareholder/directors with a view to avoiding tax amounted to the allotment of shares at a discount contrary to section 580 of the Companies Act 2006 and as well as whether the arrangements involved the payment of the company’s shares or capital money in consideration of an agreement to subscribe for shares contrary to section 552 of the Act.
- Hargreaves Property Holdings Ltd v HMRC – a case involving an appeal against assessments to income tax on the basis that the taxpayer had a duty to deduct withholding tax pursuant to s. 874 Income Tax Act 2007 (“ITA 2007”) on certain interest payments. It involved matters of whether or not the underlying commercial reality was that the interest paid on the relevant loans arose in the UK; the interest was yearly; the potential availability of treaty relief was irrelevant as the recipient of the payments had not made a claim for relief or received a direction to that effect; and to the extent that a (second) UK resident company paid out sums as consideration for the assignment to it of the right to receive a payment of interest, the company was not “beneficially entitled” to the income under s. 933 ITA 2007.
- HMRC v Jason Wilkes – This is a case involving Income Tax, High Income Child Benefit Charge and Discovery Assessments. Richard persuaded the Upper Tax Tribunal that, where a taxpayer had not submitted a self-assessment return, HMRC could not issue a discovery assessment under TMA 1970 s 29(1)(a) in respect of an unpaid high income child benefit charge.
- Richard is involved in a significant “Home Loan Scheme” which is considering whether the wide-spread IHT planning involving the sale of the family home to a trust for a debt and the settling of the debt on a separate trust is effective.
Directory quotes
Chambers and Partners High Net Worth
Tax: Private Client
Ranking: Band 1
The directory states:
- “Richard Vallat KC is excellent: extremely bright, grasps all the issues and responds quickly.” (2024)
- “Richard’s advice was clear, well structured, practical and commercially minded.” (2024)
- “Richard is incredibly smart, knowledgeable and quick.” (2024)
- “properly clever, rated extremely highly and a go-to barrister.” (2022)
- “a very practical approach and the ability to explain this both to other professionals and to clients…. he is particularly impressive in conference in listening to all the input and questions from the clients” (2020)
Chambers and Partners
Tax: Corporate
Ranking: Band 2
“Very knowledgeable and able to take difficult concepts and make them easy to understand.” “He is a methodical thinker and a clear and persuasive advocate.” (2022)
“Technically excellent and a man who provides prompt and practically-grounded lines of argument.” “He is very personable and his advocacy is very clear.” (2021)
“Articulate, concise, persuasive in his advocacy and very effective.” “He’s a very bright, technically able, strong advocate.” (2020)
“Intelligent, user-friendly and very thorough.” “Very courteous, very prepared and methodical.” (2019)
Tax: Private Client
Ranking: Band 2
“He is technically very, very good.” “A very measured and strong individual.” (2022)
“He gives pragmatic and sensible advice and does a very good job.” “Good, thorough and fair, he is a pleasure to be against and very amenable.” (2021)
“Offers excellent advice and knowledge when it comes to cases concerning estates with offshore trust and tax aspects.” “Approachable and very practical.” (2020)
Tax: Indirect Tax
Ranking: Band 3
“A talented revenue litigator who really knows his stuff.” (2022)
“He takes a very practical approach and has the ability to explain matters both to clients and to other professionals. He is particularly impressive in conference.” (2021)
“A brilliant lawyer who knows SDLT like the back of his hand.” “He is particularly good on VAT and film finance issues and is a genuine expert on all tax-related matters.” (2020)
The Legal 500
Tax: VAT
Ranking: Leading Silk, Tier 4
“Exceptionally bright and thoughtful, providing practical advice.” (2021)
“He has immense clarity of thinking and presents a clear and succinct legal analysis, which is also practical and pragmatic.” (2020)
“Specialises in all areas of revenue law.” (2019)
Tax: Corporate
Ranking: Leading Silks, Tier 3
“Exceptionally bright and thoughtful, providing practical advice.” (2021)
“He has immense clarity of thinking and presents a clear and succinct legal analysis, which is also practical and pragmatic.” (2020)
“He thinks around problems and suggests superb alternatives.” (2019)
Private Client: Personal Tax
Ranking: Leading Silks, Tier 3
“Provides very clear and practical guidance. He has a thorough knowledge of the law and its implications.” (2021)
“Personable, pragmatic and finds solutions.” (2020)
“He is clear, concise and practical.” (2019)
Memberships
Chair to the Revenue Bar Association (July 2022 onwards)
Chancery Bar Association
London Common Law & Commercial Bar Association
Stamp Tax Practitioners Group
Career & education
Career
February 2018 – KC
September 2016 – Appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown – “A” panel
March 2011 – Appointed Junior Counsel to the Crown – “B” panel
Called 1997, Gray’s Inn
Education
1991-1995: Merton College, Oxford MA
1995-1996: City University, Diploma in Law
1996-1997: Inns of Court School of Law, Bar Finals
2002-2005: Open University. BSc (Hons)(Maths)